brainstorming
Socratic questioning protocol + user communication.
34
18%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agent/skills/brainstorming/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is critically underdeveloped across all dimensions. It provides no concrete actions, no natural trigger terms, no guidance on when to use it, and is too generic to distinguish from other skills. Claude would have no reliable basis for selecting this skill appropriately.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'Guides users through problem-solving by asking clarifying questions, breaks down complex problems into smaller parts, helps users discover solutions through guided inquiry').
Include a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms (e.g., 'Use when the user seems stuck, asks for help thinking through a problem, or when clarifying requirements before implementation').
Specify the domain or context to reduce conflict risk (e.g., 'for debugging sessions', 'for requirements gathering', 'for learning exercises').
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description uses vague, abstract language ('Socratic questioning protocol', 'user communication') without listing any concrete actions. It does not specify what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Missing both 'what' and 'when'. The description doesn't explain what specific tasks this skill performs or when Claude should select it. No 'Use when...' clause or equivalent guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains no natural keywords users would say. 'Socratic questioning protocol' is technical jargon, and 'user communication' is overly generic. Users wouldn't naturally use these terms when seeking help. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'User communication' is extremely generic and could conflict with virtually any skill that involves interacting with users. 'Socratic questioning' is vague about the domain or context. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
37%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is essentially an empty shell - a table of contents with no substantive content. While concise, it fails to provide any actionable guidance, workflow explanation, or overview of the Socratic questioning protocol. A user reading only this file would have no idea what the protocol actually entails or how to apply it.
Suggestions
Add a brief 'Quick Start' section showing the core Socratic questioning workflow (e.g., the 3 mandatory questions) directly in the main file
Include at least one concrete example of the protocol in action - showing a vague request and the resulting clarifying questions
Add a workflow summary explaining how the 11 sub-skills connect and in what order they should be applied
Provide a brief description of what each sub-skill covers so readers can navigate without clicking every link
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is extremely lean - just a brief description and a list of sub-skill references. No unnecessary explanation or padding. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides no concrete guidance, examples, or executable instructions. It's entirely a table of contents pointing elsewhere with no actionable content in the main file. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | While sub-skills are numbered, there's no explanation of the workflow sequence, when to use which module, or how they connect. The numbered list implies order but doesn't explain the process. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References are one level deep and clearly signaled, but the main file provides zero overview content - it's purely navigation with no quick-start or summary of what the protocol actually involves. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- Dokhacgiakhoa/antigravity-ide
- Commit
332e58b
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.